Home Politics & Debate
Come and join our Support Circle, every Tuesday, 8 - 9:30pm! Limited spaces available! Sign up here

Condy visits Blackburn

24

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I would rather see Hilary and her husbands Democrats back in the white house with their "Third way economics" and deficit economy! Clinton Clinton Clinton!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Democrats are a near cert to win the next election regardless of who's running.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Democrats are a near cert to win the next election regardless of who's running.
    I'm sure Hilary Clinton's bearing that in mind...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    seen her on tv with a bastards shirt, doesnt really float my boat.

    im sure you P+D people will appriciate my comments but what a state
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Democrats are a near cert to win the next election regardless of who's running.
    you still believe in elections?
    you believe there will still be elections in america ...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    Democrats are a near cert to win the next election regardless of who's running.

    Not really. Given how personality orientated US politics is and especially presidential elections it can become pretty irrelevant to talk of Democrats and Republicans. If the Democrats nominate Hillary they’ll lose, she’s hated almost everywhere outside of the northeast and California. On the other hand if the Democrats nominate Mark Warner, a former governor of Virginia who is seen to have broader appeal they’ll have a chance. While he’s tipped to run again he won’t get the nomination but I think Edwards would be a good choice for the Democrats.

    It depends on who the Republicans nominate too, if they go for a moderate Republican like John McCain or Rudolph Giuliani tbh I don’t think the Democrats have much chance at all but if the Republicans nominate someone closely associated with Bush it’ll help the Dems. Although while Condi fits into that category I think if she did run she could win, she’s undoubtedly one of the most talented Republicans and would make an excellent President.

    Anyway I’m proud that Condi Rice is in Britain, given the hole that Blackburn is if I lived there I’d be pretty flattered that somebody so important had chose to visit. It’s a shame they couldn’t take her to nicer parts of the country although part of the purpose of the visit was to see Straw’s hometown but regardless it’s fantastic that she’s came here.

    And I really don’t see the fuss in a few losers with nothing better to do ‘protesting’ at her visit – their numbers are pretty miniscule and watching the television reports of these ‘protests’ it’s pretty evident that most ‘protesters’ present could barely string a sentence together let alone form a rational and reasoned opinion of Ms Rice. Interesting to see that the protests featured teachers waving National Union of Teachers banners together with school kids bunking off school – indoctrination? Then there’s the usual crowd of unemployed nobodies recruited at the pub by some overgrown student leader from the ‘Stop the War Coalition.’ For the most part she got a warm welcome and I hope she remembers and people in the US that the silent majority have no objection to her visit.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Republocrats and democrians eh?

    Why focus on all that irrelevent shit?

    It's never been truer that whoever you vote for the government will get in.
    Anyway I’m proud that Condi Rice is in Britain, given the hole that Blackburn is if I lived there I’d be pretty flattered that somebody so important had chose to visit. It’s a shame they couldn’t take her to nicer parts of the country although part of the purpose of the visit was to see Straw’s hometown but regardless it’s fantastic that she’s came here.

    Most of Blackburn is quite lovely. It would be, it's mainly woodland and heathy moorlands. Town centre and so on is ofc identical to every other town in the "UK". Bring a mac though if you wander over there, and do your best not to be asian in the wrong parts of town. :)
    For the most part she got a warm welcome and I hope she remembers and people in the US that the silent majority have no objection to her visit.

    For the most part people realise that protests don't do anything. and so stay at home. Most folks would be delighted if people like Straw and Rice (the donkeyfood duo) would fuck off for good.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    I was wondering what that might be. Care to inform us ignorant Southerners?

    4000 holes in Blackburn Lancashire...enough to fill the Albert Hall. Beatles innit.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Please, Edwards would be a great nominee for President from the Democrats point of view, he is the camp cowboy after all and with the success of Brokeback mountain, who can go against him. But saying that, he is not as much of a heavy weight or as experienced as a president should be (then again Bush isnt either!) so i reckon he will yet again get the Vice President nod behind Hilary Clinton.

    The Republicans will not at all nominate amoderate and i do not think any hard righter will be able to win. I think for the first time in many years the Republican grass route support will be the parties downfall.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And I really don’t see the fuss in a few losers with nothing better to do ‘protesting’ at her visit
    Would you care to elaborate on why they are "losers"?

    If having principles and basic human decency is being a loser, then yes they must losers.

    :rolleyes:
    their numbers are pretty miniscule
    Still considarably larger than the Condy Rice UK Fan Club that (didn't) assemble to welcome her... currenly consisting of Matadore and Disillusioned.
    and watching the television reports of these ‘protests’ it’s pretty evident that most ‘protesters’ present could barely string a sentence together let alone form a rational and reasoned opinion of Ms Rice.
    I bet they're still a hundred times more eloquent than the semi-literate, thick-as-two-short-planks chimpanzee who is Rice's boss and the President of the US.
    Interesting to see that the protests featured teachers waving National Union of Teachers banners together with school kids bunking off school – indoctrination? Then there’s the usual crowd of unemployed nobodies recruited at the pub by some overgrown student leader from the ‘Stop the War Coalition.’ For the most part she got a warm welcome and I hope she remembers and people in the US that the silent majority have no objection to her visit.
    What makes you say that? The silent majority wasn't there to welcome her either, was it? Nice logic :D
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    The silent majority wasn't there to welcome her either, was it? Nice logic :D

    Most people don’t have a problem with a representative of a foreign government, in this case the USA visiting this country. It’s funny how the far-left rarely kick up much of a fuss when Chinese leaders are in town...

    Why wasn’t the silent majority there to welcome her? I guess it’s because most of them work for a living and don’t really have anything to protest about – Rice is visiting and is here. I remember even from when Bush was here polling of the British public displayed support for his visit so it’s extremely unlikely that most people opposed Rice’s visit.

    I don’t like China’s leader, or the King of Saudi Arabia and it’s undeniable that Chinese and Saudi human rights abuses make US misdemeanours look even more inconsequential – but I wouldn’t object to them visiting this country. The foreign secretary meeting his equivalent counterpart from a foreign country – that is also our best ally is surely part of his job.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    She's not any more evil than the rest of em, she's just a politician, of course she's after herself and nobody else.

    Can always hope they all get ebola.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Most people don’t have a problem with a representative of a foreign government, in this case the USA visiting this country. It’s funny how the far-left rarely kick up much of a fuss when Chinese leaders are in town...
    Funnily enough it's usually people from the 'left' (though not exclusively, other people from other and none political leanings also join them) who actually protest against officials from unpleasant regimes coming to town, being Chinese or anyone else.

    And why would it be otherwise? There are a few honourable exceptions but generally speaking left-of-centre people have far more morals and principles than right-of-centre folks and they don't think it's acceptable to be allies with nasty regimes for the sake of economical gain or geopolitical games.
    Why wasn’t the silent majority there to welcome her? I guess it’s because most of them work for a living and don’t really have anything to protest about – Rice is visiting and is here. I remember even from when Bush was here polling of the British public displayed support for his visit so it’s extremely unlikely that most people opposed Rice’s visit.
    I'd say most people (rightly) view her for what she is: another nasty neocon with no principles or honesty, happy to defend the use of torture, to lie and be nothing more than another mouthpiece for the neocon movement.

    Most people will be aware of her deep links with the oil industry and in particular with arguably the most hated and despicable company on earth, Exxon, which loves her so much it named an oil tanker after her.

    Others might remember her silence when a US-backed coup almost suceeded in overthrowing the democratic government of Venezuela, and how after Chavez managed to restore democracy to the country she not only refused to apologise for her country's fucking disgusting attempt to overthrow yet another democracy but told Chavez he should see the attempted coup as a warning that he must 'steady ship because the US didn't like the way it was heading'.

    And the rest will have been repulsed at her patronising statement that the US government doesn't really want to be the world's jailer or that it doesn't approve of torture methodes.

    I mean, what's to like about the woman? :confused:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Most people don’t have a problem with a representative of a foreign government, in this case the USA visiting this country. It’s funny how the far-left rarely kick up much of a fuss when Chinese leaders are in town...

    I love your selective memory
    http://newswww.bbc.net.uk/1/hi/uk/4419610.stm
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote:
    Funnily enough it's usually people from the 'left' (though not exclusively, other people from other and none political leanings also join them) who actually protest against officials from unpleasant regimes coming to town, being Chinese or anyone else.

    I’m not so sure. Most of the groups opposed to China seem pretty single-issue, there’s certainly no wide movement on the left opposing the likes of China, Iran and Saudi Arabia for having truly appalling human rights records. It’s undeniable that the left channels far more of its energies into opposing America and Israel than anywhere else.
    Aladdin wrote:
    And why would it be otherwise? There are a few honourable exceptions but generally speaking left-of-centre people have far more morals and principles than right-of-centre folks and they don't think it's acceptable to be allies with nasty regimes for the sake of economical gain or geopolitical games.

    They don’t? Er what about France? Centre-left, if not Socialist French governments have in the past propped up dozens of African dictators for economic gain...And much of the left in France that supported Chirac’s opposition to the Iraq war did so because France reaped billions out of their special relationship with Saddam. What about Cuba? Pick up the Morning Star and there’s plenty defending Castro and arguing for closer ties with him.
    Aladdin wrote:
    I'd say most people (rightly) view her for what she is: another nasty neocon with no principles or honesty, happy to defend the use of torture, to lie and be nothing more than another mouthpiece for the neocon movement.

    The US doesn't approve of torture methods...Although I think Dershowitz might have a point on that one.
    Aladdin wrote:
    I mean, what's to like about the woman? :confused:

    Well regardless of whether you like her or not as Secretary of State Britain has to work with her. But anyway she’s a Beatles fan for a start. :p She’s extremely intelligent, eloquent and capable, she has represented the US overseas well and were she to run for President she would stand up for similar values to Bush yet at the same time appear more agreeable to the rest of the world and win support from overseas in areas where Bush hasn’t. I think the special relationship between Britain and America could also be strengthened under Condie, I think overall she would be better received as president here and overall in Europe than Bush. She’d be good for America and good for Britain. There’s plenty to like about her. Condie '08! :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    you don't half chat some shit
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I’m not so sure. Most of the groups opposed to China seem pretty single-issue, there’s certainly no wide movement on the left opposing the likes of China, Iran and Saudi Arabia for having truly appalling human rights records. It’s undeniable that the left channels far more of its energies into opposing America and Israel than anywhere else.
    The left movement, if there is such a thing, generally doesn't approve of having cozy relationships with the likes of Saudi Arabia actually. It's usually right wingers who approve of such relationships because right wingers like money above all else, and there is a lot of that to be made through arms sales.


    They don’t? Er what about France? Centre-left, if not Socialist French governments have in the past propped up dozens of African dictators for economic gain...And much of the left in France that supported Chirac’s opposition to the Iraq war did so because France reaped billions out of their special relationship with Saddam. What about Cuba? Pick up the Morning Star and there’s plenty defending Castro and arguing for closer ties with him.
    Governments do often fare as bad as each other in their relationships with unpleasant regimes. But we were talking about people (in particular protestors) were we not?


    The US doesn't approve of torture methods...Although I think Dershowitz might have a point on that one.
    It might not approve of them in public, but it certainly does in the comfort and privacy of its own detention camps.


    Well regardless of whether you like her or not as Secretary of State Britain has to work with her. But anyway she’s a Beatles fan for a start. :p She’s extremely intelligent, eloquent and capable, she has represented the US overseas well and were she to run for President she would stand up for similar values to Bush
    Well there you have it... Most people think the values Bush stand for as are abhorrent as they can get :)
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    you don't half chat some shit

    For once we agree.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I love the way dis slags the left for supposedly not opposing some dictatorships while simultaneously cheerleading a system that cosies up to these people in the name of profit. Hypocritical? Mai, oui.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be fair, Dis has only ever said that killing in the name of fiction is ok, it's a fairly widespread thing.

    People on the left have no real problem with violence as long as it gets them what they want. Violence against foreign people and stealing from them is bad, but theft and coercion at home is fine if it provides benefits for the poor.

    Those on the right think this is fine the other way around - no theft at home through taxes, robbing foreigners blind is fine.

    This is why there is no real difference between the left and right in politics as far as I am concerned.
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Stalin's Organist Posts: 13,327
    klintock wrote:
    This is why there is no real difference between the left and right in politics as far as I am concerned.

    I would like to agree party there. But I know why you think like that :p Entirley different approach.

    Mild Left - Mild Right - same thing, different name to the activities being indulged in.

    Totalitarian Regeimes, left or right... employ the same methods. Both are there, for power.

    Benevolent Regeimes like Castro's are extremley rare. Enjoy them whilst they are about.

    As for True Communism... never seen it. How can we know until then? Then again... it'll take alot to bring it about! Never likley to see it in my lifetime. People on the Left... no problem with violence... yes, as long as it is for the right reasons. Which it very rarely is.

    Dis... contradicts himself a few times, but I can see where he is coming from. He appears to actually be Fox News. E.g: Wrong. Often.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Funny thing is, klintock is about as far to the right as you can get, economically speaking.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Funny thing is, klintock is about as far to the right as you can get, economically speaking.

    And as far to the left as you can get on social policy. Basically if you can do it voluntary, it's alright in my book, if you can't it's not worth doing. As little violence as possible please is my motto. In short a voluntaryist libertarian.

    Teh Gerbil.

    That left/right thing you posted is a bit false. It assumes you have to have a state. It's like saying you can have slavery with them in chains working all day in back breaking conditions or you can have slavery with the chains off and those are the only two alternatives.

    How about like, you know, no slaves?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    Benevolent Regeimes like Castro's are extremley rare. Enjoy them whilst they are about.

    AI would possibly disagree. http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/cub-summary-eng

    As would Reporters sans frontiers - which puts Cuba 134th out of 139 (with only Bhutan, Turkmenistan, Burma, China and North Korea doing worse http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=4116

    If you regard Cuba as benevolent I'd hate to see what your idea of despotic is...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well we can all play that game
    Serious human rights violations took place in the context of the United Kingdom (UK) authorities’ response to the 11 September 2001 attacks in the USA.
    http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/Gbr-summary-eng

    not that I'm supporting Castro, just pointing out that our government is pretty guilty too
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Blagsta wrote:
    Well we can all play that game


    http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/Gbr-summary-eng

    not that I'm supporting Castro, just pointing out that our government is pretty guilty too

    Whatever the failings of the UK (and they're are many) do you think that in terms of human rights violations, elections and lack of press freedom we are the same as 'benevolent' Cuba?

    Now the fact that Cuba is worse shouldn't stop us criticising our own government, but at the same time because we're not perfect shouldn't stop people pointing out they're is a hell of a lot of places which are a lot worse.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    did you read my entire post?
    Blagsta wrote:
    not that I'm supporting Castro
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Stalin's Organist Posts: 13,327
    NQA wrote:
    AI would possibly disagree. http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/cub-summary-eng

    As would Reporters sans frontiers - which puts Cuba 134th out of 139 (with only Bhutan, Turkmenistan, Burma, China and North Korea doing worse http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=4116

    If you regard Cuba as benevolent I'd hate to see what your idea of despotic is...

    I like how Iraq, Iran, Zimbabwae, Belarus, and so forth are ABOVE Cuba.

    They can Disagree, but they cannot tell me that the Regeimes of Saddam, Mugaba, and the Ayatolla are BETTER to live in. I am pretty sure they are NOT. I would far rather live in Cuba and have a better life than many people in the USA of A, even if I am not allowed some freedoms - my healthcare system is far better, as are severall other things. And my economy still grows.

    Castro is no saint. But he is far better than what Cuba had before, and is probably one of the better dictators. To be fair, he hasn't been that shitty to the majority of his people.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    I like how Iraq, Iran, Zimbabwae, Belarus, and so forth are ABOVE Cuba.

    They can Disagree, but they cannot tell me that the Regeimes of Saddam, Mugaba, and the Ayatolla are BETTER to live in. I am pretty sure they are NOT. I would far rather live in Cuba and have a better life than many people in the USA of A, even if I am not allowed some freedoms - my healthcare system is far better, as are severall other things. And my economy still grows.

    Castro is no saint. But he is far better than what Cuba had before, and is probably one of the better dictators. To be fair, he hasn't been that shitty to the majority of his people.

    Now Mugabe isn't a saint - he harrasses opposition parties and certainly the elections weren't free and fair, but there remains a semi-independent judiciary which has criticised Mugabe and overuled his decisions, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4530866.stm . In fact despite the media reports as despots in Africa go Mugabe is one of the 'relatively' better ones, certainly compared to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/country_profiles/1023151.stm or the rather charming http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/country_profiles/1054396.stm which only banned slavery in 1993.

    Iran's elections, again, are far from perfect and all candidates are vetted to ensure that they have the correct islamic potential. But at least they have them and there is some control by the people over the Government.

    Of course living in Cuba is fine if you agree with Castro, the same was true of living under Hitler (unless you disagreed with him or were Jewish). and in some things Cuba is doing well - but lets not pretend that Castro or his state are benevolent... Its just that certain people are willing to overlook his human rights record because he sticks one in the eye to the US.

    And I'm not sure its a sign of good government that so many of your people are willing to risk death by sharks and drowning to leave your paradise...
    Illicit migration to the US - using homemade rafts, alien smugglers, air flights, or via the southwest border - is a continuing problem. The US Coast Guard intercepted 2,712 individuals attempting to cross the Straits of Florida in fiscal year 2005.

    from http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/cu.html

    That said there's always the risk of these discussions turning into 'Who's your favourite dictator?' instead of saying that all of the above were pretty bad and should be condemned.
  • Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Stalin's Organist Posts: 13,327
    NQA wrote:
    Now Mugabe isn't a saint - he harrasses opposition parties and certainly the elections weren't free and fair, but there remains a semi-independent judiciary which has criticised Mugabe and overuled his decisions, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4530866.stm . In fact despite the media reports as despots in Africa go Mugabe is one of the 'relatively' better ones, certainly compared to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/country_profiles/1023151.stm or the rather charming http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/country_profiles/1054396.stm which only banned slavery in 1993.

    Iran's elections, again, are far from perfect and all candidates are vetted to ensure that they have the correct islamic potential. But at least they have them and there is some control by the people over the Government.

    At least Cuba isn't in CHOAS and actually has an Economy. Mugabe can barley say that anymore. He destroyed a fine country. Killed countless amounts. Iran... is fine. As long as you don't dissent from the laws of Islam, eh?
    NQA wrote:
    Of course living in Cuba is fine if you agree with Castro, the same was true of living under Hitler (unless you disagreed with him or were Jewish). and in some things Cuba is doing well - but lets not pretend that Castro or his state are benevolent... Its just that certain people are willing to overlook his human rights record because he sticks one in the eye to the US.
    As it is with any regeime really. Criticise it, expwect consequences. Just some are far worse than others. Over here, most I am likley to get is my actions monitored. In other places... it is death! Most Cubans have been willing to overlook this because the regeime before was even worse. Now the young generation and wondering... could it be better, as they never knew the suffering before, and look at America... and see freedom... but as always, none of the downsides.

    Grass is always greener...
    NQA wrote:
    And I'm not sure its a sign of good government that so many of your people are willing to risk death by sharks and drowning to leave your paradise...
    from http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/cu.html

    Well... people risk worse to leave places that are apparently better on that list.
    NQA wrote:
    That said there's always the risk of these discussions turning into 'Who's your favourite dictator?' instead of saying that all of the above were pretty bad and should be condemned.

    Quite.
Sign In or Register to comment.